Round Table discussion summary

In the round table discussion, group 1 discussed the potential and usage in transportation of biodiesel. Biodiesel is a renewable energy which is made from crops such as soya bean, when 20% of it is mix with normal gasoline or diesel fuel, it provide the equivalent energy power to run a vehicles engine at a cheaper price. Comparing biodiesel to other normal fuel, it emits lesser carbon dioxide which helps climate change and can be produce in a shorter period of time.

There are still concerns of biodiesel as in cold countries; it may not replace normal fuel as it has a higher freezing point than normal fuel which will clog vehicle’s engine.

The other concern is if biodiesel is to replace gasoline, food crops will be affected, as higher demand of biodiesel means more money earn from selling the soya bean which will make farms to grow soya bean more than other crops. A solution is suggested to tackle this problem; by using the government power to control the types of crop the farmer should grow in the area to average out the type of crop grow.

With the continued research and improvement on the biodiesel, it may replace fossil fuel in the future. There is a great prospective for it.

Group 2 discussed about green chemistry on whether Singapore should adopt it or not. The focus was on biodegradable plastic which is made from biomass such as corn and beans.

Green chemistry is more efficient manufacturing and better waste conversion as compare to normal plastic. Green chemistry can bring about profits and they are renewable and safe which can replace normal plastic in anyways. The concerns are is it toxic to human and will the price of plastic increase if Singapore uses green chemistry.

With the continue research of biodegradable plastic, it may one day replace the use of normal plastic and could save the earth.

Group 3 discussed about genetic engineering. It offers a great breakthrough to varying who we are today, but it also has its limits to opposition religious and humane to activists. The discussion of whether genetic engineering should be allowed is discussed.

Deciding the baby’s gender before birth and also deciding his/her future which makes the parents has a choice to decide on the babies. Deciding for the babies, there is no right or wrong answer to it. Problem of sex imbalance will occur as people prefer having male over females.

With genetic engineering, it will be able to create athletically stronger babies when they grow up, make them more resistant to diseases and also minimizing defects babies. This are more appreciate matters.

Concern of whether athletically better babies who grow up are allowed to participate in sporting event to compete again normal people. The choice was made for them before birth, but whether it is a burden or not, this is up to the people to decide.

With genetic engineering, we can make perfect babies, but what we define perfect as and what comes after perfect. Nobody knows the answers to it, but most importantly is who we are to the people around us.

WA2: Summary on views of climate change

With increasing concern over global warming, countries are trying to source for ways and invent new technologies to tackle the amount of greenhouse gases being release into the atmosphere.

The article on “CO2 Solution Commends Canada-U.S. Agreement on Carbon Capture Collaboration” shows how support from various countries can contribute to the development of carbon capture and other clean energy technologies.

As highlighted in the article, collaboration, commitment and funding support from countries like Canada and USA are some key factors that could enhance the development of carbon capture and other clean energy technologies to capture greenhouse gases before they're emitted into the atmosphere, and to maintain the standard of living.

Drawn from the article, Glenn Kelly, President & CEO of CO2 solutions stated "We applaud both governments for their commitment to formal talks to jointly advance carbon capture technologies as a solution to address greenhouse gas emissions, while simultaneously enhancing the energy security position of both countries. As a technology provider, we look forward to supporting this dialogue in any way possible."

Article obtained from: http://biz.yahoo.com/cnw/090223/e_co2solu_carboncaptu.html?.v=1

While the above article highlights the importance of joint effort from various countries to identify solutions to address greenhouse gas emissions, the following article “Capitol power plant dims clean energy hopes” touches on how a congress struggles to tackle the problem of greenhouse gas emissions.

Carbon dioxide is one of the most prevalent greenhouse gases that contributes to climate change and coal that produces carbon dioxide when burned accounts for half of U.S. electricity production.

As mentioned in the article, the congress is running out of options to make the capitol power plant fully green and cost is another concern that the congress faces especially in the mist of economic crisis.

Using carbon sequestration technology or converting the plants entirely to using natural gases were some of the ways mentioned in the article, as means to reduce carbon dioxide, however cost has been one of the concerns for such implementation.

Using carbon sequestration technology could reduce 60% of carbon dioxide emission by capturing and storing carbon dioxide to prevent it from being release into the atmosphere will cost $112 million. Other concerns for using carbon sequestration technologies include availability of disposal grounds and increase in other types of air pollutions.

Natural gases that burns cleaner then coal can reduce half as much carbon dioxide, however the cost to upgrade the equipment in existing coal fired power plants will cost about 6 to 7 million and the cost of using natural gases is four times more expensive then using coal.

Should the above be implemented, it demonstrate Congress' willingness to deal with global warming.

Article obtained from: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090302/ap_on_go_co/congress_power_plant_5